I think I'm a part of the first generation of journalists to skip print media entirely, and I've learned a lot these last few years at Forbes. My work has appeared on TVOvermind, IGN, and most importantly, a segment on The Colbert Report at one point. Feel free to follow me on Twitter or on Facebook, write me on Facebook or just email at paultassi(at)gmail(dot)com. I'm also almost finished with my sci-fi novel series, The Earthborn Trilogy.

A Eulogy for Google Plus

It may not be dead, and it’s entirely possible I’m shoveling dirt on something that’s still writhing around, promising me it is in fact the next big thing, but I’m now deaf to its cries. Google Plus is a failure no matter what the numbers may say.

25 million users in barely a month is nothing to sneeze at. Google Plus holds the honor of being one of the fastest growing websites in history, and these early numbers had analysts screaming that Facebook would be all but dead in a few more months.

But today I click on my newsfeed and see tumbleweed blowing through the barren, blank page. It’s a vast and empty wasteland, full of people who signed up but never actually stuck around to figure out how things worked in this new part of town. One simple click takes me back to Facebook, and my wall is flooded with updates and pictures from 400+ friends. This just isn’t a contest, and it never will be.

To know why G+ has failed, we must first look at how Facebook succeeded.

Facebook had exclusivity on its side, a once-upon-a-time fact we’re only reminded of when we watch The Social Network, but even when it expanded past college to the general population, it was a hundred times more user friendly and visually streamlined than MySpace. That site was destroyed by the tackiness of its own users with a propensity for glitter text GIFs and autoplaying pop songs, and when it failed to evolve, the exodus to Facebook was massive and unstoppable.

Conversely, we look at a recent failure, this time where Google came out on top. When’s the last time you got THAT frustrated with the Google search engine? Sure, you might not find what you wanted on occasion, but 99.99% of the time, it fulfills its function exceedingly well. So why on earth would anyone feel the need to switch to Bing? It may work yes, but to the average user, it doesn’t offer anything above and beyond what you’d find with Google, and in some avenues, is actually worse. But how many millions were invested in the idea? Did they really think they had come up with something to unseat the emperor of search?

Now Google has fallen into the same trap with Plus. If anyone is annoyed by Facebook, it’s simply that they’re tired of using it. Their gripes aren’t from the layout, or even the privacy settings, as much as internet outrage over the suspect Terms of Service would have you believe. Google can launch a product that fixes Facebook’s issues, and even looks a touch nicer to boot, but its biggest flaw is simply something it can’t overcome. It’s not Facebook.

My profile tells me everything I need to know about Google Plus, and I suspect the same is true for many others. As active as I am in social media and the latest and greatest internet trends, I have 26 people who have added me into circles, only 8 of them being people I wanted to add back, as for all Plus’s claims of privacy and intimacy, I don’t know most of the others. Out of those, only two post anything at all to the site, and the majority don’t even have profile pictures yet, an indicator they haven’t returned since day one. My recommended friends list is filled with people I’m actually close with, presumably pulled from my Gmail contacts, but the fact that we haven’t added each other yet describes just how little we care about this new network.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

Comments

“Facebook had exclusivity on its side, a once-upon-a-time fact we’re only reminded of when we watch The Social Network, but even when it expanded past college to the general population, it was a hundred times more user friendly and visually streamlined than MySpace. That site was destroyed by the tackiness of its own users with a propensity for glitter text GIFs and autoplaying pop songs, and when it failed to evolve, the exodus to Facebook was massive and unstoppable.”

Your reasons for Facebook’s success are exactly aligned with the reality of Google Plus’ success (because, despite what you’re saying, the site IS a success):

You said Facebook had exclusivity on its side, so does Google (it’s invite-only still), you said Facebook was more visually streamlined than MySpace — although this is subjective (and I agree), I think that Google+ is more streamlined than Facebook; it’s also much faster, has a far superior App, and handles comments and photos infinitely better. You said MySpace failed to evolve, and so Facebook became unstoppable. I think (and millions of other people think) that Facebook is failing to evolve.

Later, you said that Facebook’s only issue is users getting tired of it. I don’t think users are getting tired of the social networking product that Facebook has provided, they’re getting tired of privacy issues, a buggy App, developers are beyond annoyed with the Developer API (and how it keeps changing), and the ads on Facebook are atrocious.

Google+ just came out. So far, its success cannot even be compared with the painfully slow rise of Facebook’s back in 2004. Google is off to a much better start, and surprisingly, for being Forbes, you haven’t touched on the fact that Google’s been buying companies and investing millions of dollars left and right lately. Research that and reflect. Google is making moves; Facebook — not so much.

My number of friends on FB and number of people in circles on G+ are roughly the same… although G+ posts seem to be more focused on quality than quantity. FB feels like a bunch of people in a small space all trying to talk over each other, twitter is world where everyone is shouting with their hands over their ears, and G+ is a cocktail party where everyone is mingling and having interesting conversations.

Paul, I enjoyed this, well done. I see you struck a chord and perhaps part of this is SEO-bait, but that’s cool. Let the other commentators rant.

Your argument is valid, but the idea of people only wanting one simple social network could also be used to explain the rapid appeal of G+ and the potential demise of Facebook. Networks have a way of becoming cluttered with weak links and spam; Facebook’s old girlfriends and FarmVille updates have done much to tarnish it, just as MySpace’s glitz made its users want to flee. Fax machines, mail delivery and telephone landlines are similar old networks that, once cluttered with unwanted messages, telemarketing or junk mail, become less useful … and so we move on.

Put another way, Metcalfe’s law has an reverse statement: the disutility of a network is in direct proportion to the unwanted noise crossing its nodes.

Perhaps it’s not whether Facebook is an incumbent and Google+ is an unneeded luxury, but simply whether any network becomes unwanted when its connections draw too much buzz.

Paul – you don’t see the bigger picture how Google+ is the foundation for the Social Enterprise via Google Apps. In this era of rampant social journalism and self branding and aggrandizing as being in-the-know… this article should be your Eulogy. George Polzer YourBizzWizz.com gplus.to/gpolzer

Wow. What frivolous trash. I agree with a lot of the sentiment on the last 3 pages of comments.

I’ll agree with you one one thing – people signed up and haven’t come back just yet. That also happened in Facebook. People sign up for Netflix and their viewing history could go dormant for months. But then one day they realize how to use it and those ideals change.

I would suggest you stick to writing about games, like your profile suggests you do. Google+ isn’t a game, so it’s out of your realm.